There's lots of spice, but it's not written much better than what we got in The Kingmaker. It had the same predictable pattern, which was already routine before The Rebel King. I wish they had built this relationship on more than their independent personalities and their chemistry because it makes what is supposed to be a rare and beautiful partnership feel pretty shallow.

The politics were much more stilted and uncomfortable this time around. In The Kingmaker, a lot of the awkwardness of Maxim and Lennix's bluster and grand proclamations could be explained by their youth and inexperience. Because the focus after Amsterdam was on the relationship, there was a lot less focus on their careers and causes. In The Rebel King, though, we could barely make it through a conversation without someone spouting textbook definitions or quoting statistics that no one would have memorised unless they had just crammed for a test. It was clunky and disengaging. I’m already on board; you don’t need to convince me that climate change is bad, women shouldn’t be murdered, and that your relationship status doesn't compromise your ability to do your job. If the point was to try to convert those readers who don’t believe these things, I don’t think long speeches that needed editing were the way to do it.

As usual, I want to focus on all the negatives - why is it so hard to write reviews that focus on the good parts? Or is that just me? But even talking about how I wish I could focus on the positives, I’m struggling to think of any, and it’s making me feel like I may need to adjust my rating… two books may have been a little too much time with these characters.